The third chapter of Borg's "Jesus" is dedicated to deciphering the difference between memory and metaphor in the Gospels. Recognizing that not everything in the Bible is factually accurate is something that I have seen rarely embraced in my limited experiences with religious scholars. Borg's explanations were welcomed in my opinion, because often I have difficulty with some of the stories because they lack logic. I understand that faith does not require logic, but sometimes I really cannot help but incorporate reasoning.
But where is the line between the actual miracles and the metaphorical miracles?
If it is agreed that some events occurred, while others were fabrications in order to promote a deeper understanding, how are we supposed to decipher between the two? Are we supposed to do so, or is that a violation of our faith? If the door is opened to allow some occurrences to be written off as untrue, where will it end? Again, I definitely support the recognition that there are metaphors within the Bible, but I am wondering how and when to decipher between fact and fiction.
How do true believers, the people who have no doubt in their religion, reconcile the differences between memory and metaphor?
On a side note, I apologize for this post being both LATE and SHORT. I was halfway through writing it last week (it was saved as a draft) when I received word that there was a death in my family. Please deduct any points necessary, I promise I will try hard to not allow this to occur again.
No comments:
Post a Comment